Looking at the market of gaming monitors, one can get an unpleasant impression that there are only three resolutions – 1920 x 1080, 2560 x 1440 and 3840 x 2160. Manufacturers are reluctant to experiment with formats, because the scale of interest in new solutions is relatively small, while the monitor is a device that is rarely mentioned even by enthusiasts. Fortunately, users of tinplate are slowly discovering the charms of displays 21: 9, as well as others with non-standard proportions, which can be found quite a lot in the portfolio of leading manufacturers. This list was created on ACER monitors, which has a large offer of gaming ultrapanorams, where the most interesting are the models with the resolution 3440 x 1440, 3840 x 1200 and 3840 x 1600.

Author: Sebastian Oktaba

The aforementioned desktop big three it rules unquestionably in all statistics, with the immortal in first place 1920 x 1080 (66%), the second position is 2560 x 1440 (7%), while the third occupies 3840 x 2160 (2%). The other resolutions included in the list belong mainly to laptops, hence the presence of archaic 1366 x 768, while the newer among others 3440 x 1440. The more exotic settings are still out of the margin, however, so finding performance tests 3840 x 1200 and 3840 x 1600 is a serious problem, although they are quite interesting formats . I chose ACER monitors for comparative purposes not coincidentally, because the Taiwanese concern is a co-owner of AU Optronics, a company specializing in the production of optoelectronic components, including matrices. That is why ACER is becoming one of the leaders in introducing unusual resolutions, having probably the widest portfolio of monitors with portions next to LG 21: 9, 32: 10 and 24: 10.

Today in the editorial menu performance test AMD Radeon RX 6000 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3000 on ACER monitors with unusual resolutions 3440 x 1440, 3840 x 1200 and 3840 x 1600.

“src =” http://www.purepc.pl/image/artykul/2020 / 12 / 29 _nvidia_geforce_rtx_graphic_test _ 3000 _i_amd_radeon_rx _ 6000 _ in_resolutions _ 3440 x 1366 _ 3840 x 1200 _ i _ 3840 x 1600 _ nc 19. png “>

The heroes of today’s compilation, of course, apart from the latest AMD Radeon graphics cards 6000 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3000, ACER Predator X monitors left 35 (21: 9), ACER Predator X 38 P (24: 10) and ACER Nitro EL 431 CRP (32: 10) . However, the differences between the devices include not only resolution, format, screen diagonal or matrix type. The other details also turn out to be key, e.g. DisplayHDR support, curvature, refresh rate and / or timing according to NVIDIA and AMD standards. Basically there are three very different displays, where the ACER Predator X 38 P (24: 10) and ACER Nitro EL 431 CRP (32: 10) are real raisins. ACER Predator X 35 ((21: 9) represents a much wider product group that has already managed to find a dedicated group of satisfied users. Resolution 3440 x 1440 has been the subject of the last few tests, although 3840 x 1200 and 3840 x 1600 are debutants in our measurement procedures. The detailed technical specification of ACER monitors can be found in the table below:

	ACER Predator X 35	ACER Nitro EL 431 CRP	ACER Predator X 38 P
Resolution	3440 x 1440	3840 x 1200	3840 x 1600
Matrix diagonal	35 inch	43 all	38 inches
Screen width	89 cm	110 cm	95 cm
Matrix type	AMVA	SVA	Nano IPS
Picture format	21: 9	32: 10	24: 10
Refreshing	200 Hz	120 Hz	175 Hz
Display HDR	1000	400	400
Curvature	1800 R	1800 R	2300 R
AMD Freesync	–	Yes	–
NVIDIA G-Sync	Yes	–	Yes
Price	10000 PLN	3200 PLN	10000

AMD Radeon RX Graphics Card Test 6900 XT vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090. A duel of silicon giants for big money

I have explained several times why ultra-panoramic monitors are an interesting solution, especially for avid players who like racing, simulators, first and third person shooters, but these arguments are worth repeating quotations. Since the maximum field of view of the human eye is the widest horizontally, you can cover a larger area with the pattern without moving your head, so monitors with such proportions are very comfortable to use. This improves the ergonomics of typical office work, and also quite significantly changes the nature of digital entertainment, because thanks to the wide-angle perspective, we see more of the more important elements. We do not lose practically anything from the image generated in the lower and upper planes, while the visibility on the sides is significantly widened (being also more important). Some examples of what the perspective differences look like between 3440 x 1440, 3840 x 1200, 3840 x 1600 and 3840 x 2160 can be found on the next subpage. The rest will be completed with performance tests in three selected resolutions.